DATE: January 18, 1996
CASE NO. 95-ERA-24


IN THE MATTER OF 

DONALD J. JACKSON,

          COMPLAINANT,

     v.

SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION DIVISION 012, SAVANNAH RIVER,

          RESPONDENT.


BEFORE:   THE SECRETARY OF LABOR


                     FINAL ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
                         AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT

     This case arises under the employee protection provision of
the Energy Reorganization Act (ERA), 42 U.S.C.  5851 (1988). 
The parties submitted a Final Settlement Agreement and Release of
All Claims and Potential Claims seeking approval of the
settlement and dismissal of the complaint.  The Administrative
Law Judge issued a Recommended Order of Dismissal on November 28,
1995.
     The request for approval is based on an agreement entered
into by the parties; therefore, I must review it to determine
whether the terms are a fair, adequate and reasonable settlement
of the complaint.  24 C.F.R.  24.6.  Macktal v. Secretary of
Labor, 923 F.2d 1150, 1153-54 (5th Cir. 1991); Thompson v. U.S.
Dep't of Labor, 885 F.2d 551, 556 (9th Cir. 1989); Fuchko and
Yunker v. Georgia Power Co., Case Nos. 89-ERA-9, 89-ERA-10, Sec.
Order, Mar. 23, 1989, slip op. at 1-2. 
     The agreement appears to encompass the settlement of matters
arising under various laws, beyond the ERA.  See Paragraphs 3,
4(c),(d),(e),(I) and 10.  For the reasons set forth in Poulos v.
Ambassador Fuel Oil Co., Inc., Case No. 86-CAA-1, Sec. Order,
Nov. 2, 1987, slip op. at 2, I have limited my review of the
agreement to determining whether its terms are a fair, adequate
and reasonable settlement of the Complainant's allegations the
Respondent violated the ERA.
     Paragraph 5 contains language which provides that the 
Complainant shall keep the terms of the Settlement Agreement
confidential, except as may be required by order of court,
subpoena, or law.  I construe such language as allowing
Complainant, either voluntarily or pursuant to an order or
subpoena, to communicate with, or provide information to State
and Federal government agencies about suspected violations of law
involving the Respondent.  See Corder v. Bechtel Energy Corp.,
Sec. Order, Feb. 9, 1994, slip op. at 6-8 (finding void as
contrary to public policy a settlement agreement provision
prohibiting the complainant from communicating with federal or
state agencies concerning possible violations of law).      
     The parties' submissions, including the agreement become
part of the record of the case and are subject to the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C.  552 (1988).  FOIA requires
Federal agencies to disclose requested records unless they are
exempt from disclosure under the Act.  See Debose v.
Carolina Power and Light Co., Case No. 92-ERA-14, Order
Disapproving Settlement and Remanding Case, Feb. 7, 1994, slip
op. at 2-3 and cases there cited. 
     Paragraph 14 provides that the agreement will be governed by
the laws of South Carolina.  I construe this provision as
excepting the authority of the Secretary of Labor and any Federal
court which shall be governed in all respects by the laws and
regulations of the United States.  See Phillips v. Citizens
Ass'n for Sound Energy, Case No. 91-ERA-25, Final Order of
Dismissal, Nov. 4, 1991, slip op. at 2.
     I find that the agreement, as here construed, is a fair,
adequate and reasonable settlement of the complaints.
Accordingly, I APPROVE the agreement and DISMISS THE COMPLAINT
WITH PREJUDICE.  Paragraph 4(c).  
     SO ORDERED.


                              ROBERT B. REICH
                              Secretary of Labor

Washington, D.C.